If I create an ext3 partition today, can I upgrade it to reiser3/4 later on without obliterating all of the data on that partition?

In theory yes. You'll have to copy the data to another location, then run mkfs on the partition then move everything back to the partition. You'll obliterate whats on it, but you wont lose the data you decide to keep._________________~~ Peter: Programmer, Mathematician, STEM & Free Software Advocate, Enlightened Agent, Transhumanist, Fedora contributor
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF

If I create an ext3 partition today, can I upgrade it to reiser3/4 later on without obliterating all of the data on that partition?

In theory yes. You'll have to copy the data to another location, then run mkfs on the partition then move everything back to the partition. You'll obliterate whats on it, but you wont lose the data you decide to keep.

The only way to be completely safe from fs-crash is by not using a computer
Search the forums, and you will find horror stories about ALL filesystems ( ext3,r3,r4,jfs,xfs included ). So if you'll be storing any ICBM launch codes, make a backup on a different fs on different hardware.

Yeah! You are right here. But some filesystems tend to have critical fails more than others do. For me reiser4 is just a very unmature fs wich raises the probability of such kind of issues to unaceptable levels. Just an opinion, of course._________________Gentoo Handbook | My website

What I said was directed to people saying: "X failed me once, so Y rocks". Stable != perfect, and perfection does not exist. Everything fails once in while. So if your data is absolutely critical you should look into backing it up, not finding the perect fs.

This is beyond me: why would people want to use Reiser4 at all? Imo, the whole fs is just plain bullshit and hans reiser should be jailed for putting it out._________________There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta

This is beyond me: why would people want to use Reiser4 at all? Imo, the whole fs is just plain bullshit and hans reiser should be jailed for putting it out.

because at least it promised some things other (linux) filesystems can't do, and some benchmarks show it IS faster than others. And as there is no reliable, repeatable (by others) way to loose data with it anymore, Hans decided to put it out, for some more testing. nothing wrong with that, imho.

This is beyond me: why would people want to use Reiser4 at all? Imo, the whole fs is just plain bullshit and hans reiser should be jailed for putting it out.

because at least it promised some things other (linux) filesystems can't do, and some benchmarks show it IS faster than others. And as there is no reliable, repeatable (by others) way to loose data with it anymore, Hans decided to put it out, for some more testing. nothing wrong with that, imho.

Nothing wrong with that, I don't pretend to censore anything, freedom is the point in linux, as you say if I don't love it there's not reason for me to use it.

Just a couple of things I don't agree:

1.- I dont think they have acomplished what they promissed at all. If by 'some things other filesystems can't do' you mean atomic opperations there's no point here, since operations would only be atomic with the necesary hardware support, that, as far as i'm aware do not exist.

2.- Benchmarks do not show that it is faster than others (well, maybe the ones in the homepage of namesys they do), but the rest of the test all over the net show that reiser4 is faster for some things, and one of the slower for some others. So, this is also a lie._________________Gentoo Handbook | My website

This is beyond me: why would people want to use Reiser4 at all? Imo, the whole fs is just plain bullshit and hans reiser should be jailed for putting it out.

because at least it promised some things other (linux) filesystems can't do, and some benchmarks show it IS faster than others. And as there is no reliable, repeatable (by others) way to loose data with it anymore, Hans decided to put it out, for some more testing. nothing wrong with that, imho.

Nothing wrong with that, I don't pretend to censore anything, freedom is the point in linux, as you say if I don't love it there's not reason for me to use it.

Just a couple of things I don't agree:

1.- I dont think they have acomplished what they promissed at all. If by 'some things other filesystems can't do' you mean atomic opperations there's no point here, since operations would only be atomic with the necesary hardware support, that, as far as i'm aware do not exist.

2.- Benchmarks do not show that it is faster than others (well, maybe the ones in the homepage of namesys they do), but the rest of the test all over the net show that reiser4 is faster for some things, and one of the slower for some others. So, this is also a lie.

I know nothing of 1), but about 2 I think this is just because their tests are really benchmarks, very synthetic. most other tests on the net are more real-world, things like compiling or extracting a kernel. the advantage of their tests is that it might be closer to the average use, while the kernel-compile tests just show a specific case. they don't say reiser4 is faster for big, or for small files - it is mostly faster for their specific set of files (eg x files of 4k, x files of 8k etc etc, guess you checked their benchmarks). to me, the way they selected these fileset seems resonable to me. but sure, other benchmarks/tests show other numbers. they developed and tested their filesystem (I guess) mainly with their own benchmark, duh it works good. they should have used/should use other tests, that's for sure.

This is beyond me: why would people want to use Reiser4 at all? Imo, the whole fs is just plain bullshit and hans reiser should be jailed for putting it out.

because at least it promised some things other (linux) filesystems can't do, and some benchmarks show it IS faster than others. And as there is no reliable, repeatable (by others) way to loose data with it anymore, Hans decided to put it out, for some more testing. nothing wrong with that, imho.

- These absolutely pointless features, pointless at this time anyway, cause Reiser4 is limited to the x86 architecture.
- Reiser4 just doesn't fulfill the promises
- Large portition of the code is just broken

Don't get me wrong, I've tested the filesystem many times my self. There is NO speed increase over Reiser3.6 except in perhaps updating the portage tree. Everything is SLOWER, and in some cases UNUSABLE. Not talking about fs corruptions, i had many of them. Shortly Reiser4 is a crock of shit at this time, and should be nowhere near the RC stage of development.

Quote:

Don't love it? So simply don't use it!

I don't._________________There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta

agree++ _________________ "Time is a companion that goes with us on a journey. It reminds us to cherish each moment, because it will never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we have lived" J-L. Picard

- These absolutely pointless features, pointless at this time anyway, cause Reiser4 is limited to the x86 architecture.

The code works quite ok on AMD64 now, and the plan is to extend it to other architectures anyway (which is fairly straightforward, they are not doing it yet because they are stabilizing it - sheesh, it is not even in mainline yet).

As for the innovative features, they are disabled because the kernel hackers (rightly) think that these must implemented at the VFS layer, instead of on a per-filesystem basis. It is not clear what will happen yet, but Hans Reiser is one of the few who try to truly innovate, and the potential in Reiser4 is great. So IMO it is too early to say if these features are "absolutely pointless". This is one of the few occasions in which Linux can really "take the lead" in a specific field, it would be a shame to waste it.

petrjanda wrote:

- Reiser4 just doesn't fulfill the promises

Care to elaborate?

petrjanda wrote:

- Large portition of the code is just broken

I gather you read through the reiser4 sources then? Care to post specific problems to reiserfs-list?

Beside I'm just sick of people saying "XYZ fs sucks because I lost data on it". As someone pointed out you can read horror stories about every fs all around. This is not an objective reason to dump a fs. Finally, keep in mind how long Reiser4 has been around compared to reiser3, jfs, xfs, ext2/3 (which BTW have been in vanilla for quite long now). You really can't draw any conclusion on its stability at this stage._________________

Albert Einstein wrote:

I consider it [...] urgently necessary for [...] workers to get together, both to protect their own economic status and [...] to secure their influence in the political field.

I wrote a script today that is going to test the emerge of time (+/-25 sec on my pc) 4 times for ext3, reiser4 and reiser3 as filesystems for /usr/portage and /var/tmp/portage. it will do these tests for 2.6.11-gentoo-r4, 2.6.12-rc2-vivid1, 2.6.12-rc2-nitro1, and 2.6.11-cko3... I'll post the results as soon as I have them. The script is not finished yet, and I have to test it.

- These absolutely pointless features, pointless at this time anyway, cause Reiser4 is limited to the x86 architecture.

The code works quite ok on AMD64 now, and the plan is to extend it to other architectures anyway (which is fairly straightforward, they are not doing it yet because they are stabilizing it - sheesh, it is not even in mainline yet).

And quite gladly it won't be for some time.

Quote:

As for the innovative features, they are disabled because the kernel hackers (rightly) think that these must implemented at the VFS layer, instead of on a per-filesystem basis.

Those features are NOT innovative, and have never worked correctly, and use too much CPU.

petrjanda wrote:

- Large portition of the code is just broken

Quote:

I gather you read through the reiser4 sources then? Care to post specific problems to reiserfs-list?

I won't submit anything to reiserfs list, because I don't support Hans's way of doing things, and his attitude.

Quote:

Beside I'm just sick of people saying "XYZ fs sucks because I lost data on it". As someone pointed out you can read horror stories about every fs all around. This is not an objective reason to dump a fs. Finally, keep in mind how long Reiser4 has been around compared to reiser3, jfs, xfs, ext2/3 (which BTW have been in vanilla for quite long now). You really can't draw any conclusion on its stability at this stage.

Of course you can read horror stories on pretty much every fs out there, but reiser4 is the only one called "final" by its creator while in reality its not even RC ready._________________There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta

Features don't use any CPU. Implementations do. You have to start somewhere, and the first attempt is never the final one.

Quote:

because I don't support Hans's way of doing things, and his attitude.

Which is ?

Quote:

but reiser4 is the only one called "final" by its creator while in reality its not even RC ready.

Can you picture an fs development process that allows a company with a dozen programmers and a limited set of test hardware to develop an fs that runs flawlessly on all hardware ?

In case someone has not understood this allready: reiser4 is still in development. In both code-debugging and design-debugging. It as final as Linux 2.6.0 was ! It is at the point where it needs mass testing. You don't feel like risking your data in the name of an fs ? Great ! Neither do I ! This does not mean I will not use it once it goes really stable.

If you believe there is something fundamentally wrong with reiser4, please , for the good of the entire Linux community , stop by and explain yourself point by point, and how you think things should be done. The reset is just a flamewar....

[imho]
reiser4 idea is promising.
reiser4 implementation for the day 18/04/2005 " isnt so good " .
conclusion ? : maybe in next years will be better.

everybody has free will to use anything.

I dont using riser4 , Im choosed interactivity. Some combinations for me are "little" strange when Pople for example choosing filesystem with maximal latencies ( reiser4 ) and CPU Scheduler with minimal latencies hehe ( IngoSched + RTP stuff ) . Maybe people should be more decided what they want from the system

Or some people that using reiser4/reiserfs and complains about high cpu usage and low interactivity of rest of the system during high fs usage.

Once again , there is no magic in the world . and any FS isnt magical. Every each one has positives and negatives.
[/imho]
cheers._________________ "Time is a companion that goes with us on a journey. It reminds us to cherish each moment, because it will never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we have lived" J-L. Picard

cheers._________________ "Time is a companion that goes with us on a journey. It reminds us to cherish each moment, because it will never come again. What we leave behind is not as important as how we have lived" J-L. Picard

1.- I dont think they have acomplished what they promissed at all. If by 'some things other filesystems can't do' you mean atomic opperations there's no point here, since operations would only be atomic with the necesary hardware support, that, as far as i'm aware do not exist.

If by 'some things other filesystems can't do' you mean atomic opperations there's no point here, since operations would only be atomic with the necesary hardware support, that, as far as i'm aware do not exist.

I somewhat doubt this argument. If no atomicity could be achived what is all the fuzz about journalling ? My system has come up back intact from every abrupt shutdown/reboot. Why is that ? Pure luck ?